DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This letter is in response to your request for information concerning the structure and nature of the Appalachian Regional Commission's activities in the field of environmental research. The numbered paragraphs of this letter correspond to the numbered paragraphs in your questionnaire.

1. The nucleus of the Commission's environmental staff is included in the program development group of the Commission's staff. This group is comprised of four professionals primarily concerned with environmental problems and natural resources. In addition, there is a flexible supporting staff comprised of other senior individuals on the Commission (such as institutional and intergovernmental relation specialists, etc.) and short-term consultants. The Commission operates no scientific laboratories. Please see the attached organizational diagram.

2. The advanced degrees of the Commission's environmental and resources staff include: a Ph.D. in physical chemistry, an M.S. in geography, an M.A. in economics, and an M.S. in geology.

3. The environmental and resources group is not funded as a separate item appropriation in the overall Commission budget. However, in some instances specific requests contained in the Commission's legislation in effect constitute such a directive. Presently, the Commission has allocated approximately $2 million per year for the activities of the environmental staff and research.

4. The environmental group has been involved in many aspects of the environmental problems of the Appalachian Region. Recent work has been centered upon such topics as: identification of improved surface mining and reclamation techniques in order to eliminate environmental impacts from mining coal, manpower and health and safety problems in the Region, the mineral fuel industry of the Region and the impact of various types of different public policies, the planning of multi-county solid waste disposal systems, developing a program for junk car disposition, water resource planning and development, development of an overall environmental improvement program for the Monongahela River Basin and initiating overall land use analysis with particular attention to specific regional problems such as the effects of strip mining.

Much of this research, in particular the coal and mineral fuels industries studies, can be considered basic economic research. The Commission is not directly engaged in basic scientific research or technologic development, nor are we currently involved in research projects directed at eco-system structure. The activities of the environmental and resource group are "applied" in nature. 5. The Commission is not supporting specific research projects directed at ecosystem structure and function.

6. Virtually all of the research supported by the Commission is conducted by independent research firms, universities or individuals under contract to the Commission. The supervision of this work and its integration with the overall Commission's program is provided by the Commission's staff. Approximately 15 percent of research funds are expended at universities, and the balance with independent research firms or individuals.

7. The institutional arrangement of the Commission itself provides an excellent mechanism for the identification of large-scale regional and environmental questions which should be approached by interdisciplinary teams. To some extent, all of the Commission research reflects this since Commission staffing itself (667)

represents an interdisciplinary approach to regional problem solving. Coordination of the Commission's environmental activities with the Environmental Protection Agency is accomplished through the role that the staff of the Federal Cochairman plays in Commission activities as well as the professional relationships between the Commission staff and individuals at EPA and the Council on Environmental Quality. The Commission has attempted to keep to a minimum memoranda or letters of agreement detailing such program coordination, since these often tend to become ends in themselves. However, enclosed is a recent agreement indicating the coordination and focus of the Commission work on environmental problems within the Monongahela River Basin.

I hope that you find this information useful to you in your deliberations concerning legislation to establish national environmental laboratories. Please let us know if there is additional information which we may be able to provide. Sincerely yours,

Enclosure.

DONALD W. WHITEHEAD,
Federal Cochairman.

INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND THE APPALACHIAN REGIONAL COMMISSION

1. This agreement is made between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) in order to carry out their several responsibilities expressed in the Conference Report which accompanied the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1971 (Public Law 91-665; 84 Stat. 1981, January 8, 1971), which indicated that a portion of the funds made available in the Supplemental Appropriations Act to the Environmental Protection Agency for "pollution control, operation and research," was for a study and demonstration of methods for the elimination and control of acid and other mine water pollution in the Monongahela River Basin and which indicated that the portion of such study and demonstration relating to potential economic development in the Basin should be carried on under the direction of ARC. (H. Rep. No. 91-1794, 91st Congress, 2nd Session, p. 10 (1970).) This agreement is authorized under sections 102 (2) and 106 (7) of the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965, as amended (40 USCA App. § 102 (2) and 106(7)).

2. Acid and other mine water pollution and other environmental problems, resulting from past exploitation of natural resources, have inhibited and continue to inhibit economic development in areas of the Appalachian region, such as the Monongahela River Basin. The ARC will study the interrelationships of such pollution and environmental problems and potential economic development in the Monongahela Basin in order, among other things, to develop prototype plans for environmental reclamation designed to remove obstacles to economic development, which could be applied to similar natural areas elsewhere in the region. The ARC will design and conduct such portion of the study and demonstration mentioned in 1. above in general accord with the outline descriptions in the following listed previous correspondence between ARC and EPA :

(a) letter from Stanley M. Greenfield, Assistant Administrator for Research and Monitoring, EPA, to Donald W. Whitehead, Federal Cochairman, ARC, June 4, 1971;

(b) letter from Donald W. Whitehead, Federal Cochairman, and John D. Whisman. States' Regional Representative, ARC, to Honorable David D. Dominick, Deputy Assistant Administrator of Water Programs, EPA, June 7, 1971: and

(c) letter from Donald W. Whitehead, Federal Cochairman, ARC, to Honorable David D. Dominick, Deputy Assistant Administrator of Water Programs, EPA, June 16, 1971.

It is understood that the foregoing correspondence sets forth only a general outline summary of the ARC portion of the study and demonstration and that the direction and scope thereof are subject to refinement or change by ARC as the design and implementation proceed and more detailed information is obtained. 3. EPA agrees to transfer $500.000 to the ARC for the ARC portion of the study and demonstration, and ARC agrees that the amounts so transferred to ARC will be used to defray the costs thereof. Transfer of the funds will be effected through the use of a Standard Form 1081.

4. It is anticipated that the total cost of the ARC portion of the project will not exceed the estimated cost of $500.000 and that the amount transferred by EPA to ARC will be sufficient to cover such costs. ARC agrees to use its best efforts to design, conduct, supervise and carry out the ARC portion of the study and demonstration as described in paragraph 2. and its obligations under this interagency agreement within this estimated cost. EPA shall not be obligated to reimburse ARC for costs incurred in excess of the total estimated costs set forth above, unless and until EPA shall have notified ARC in writing that such estimated cost ceiling on EPA participation has been increased and has specified in such notice a revised estimated cost ceiling for its participation. When and to the extent that the estmated costs set forth above have been increased, any costs incurred by ARC in excess of such estimated costs prior to the increase in the ceiling, shall be allowable to the same extent as if the costs had been incurred after such increase. In the exent that the costs of the study and demonstration are less than the estimated costs set out above, funds in excess to study needs would be returned to EPA.

5. ARC will establish appropriate accounts for the ARC portion of the study and demonstration and shall make quarterly reports to EPA of the status of such accounts. ARC shall keep a record of costs incurred and expenditures made, on a cumulative basis from the inception of the project, and shall include such information in its reports to the EPA.

6. Mr. Donald A. Crane, Associate Director, Environment and Resources Planning, is designated Project Coordinator for the ARC. Mr. Crane's office is located at Room 431, 1666 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20235, telephone: 202/967–3502. The ARC Project Coordinator shall maintain liaison with EPA and advise them as to progress on the design and implementation of the study and demonstration carried out under this agreement.

Hon. DAVID D. DOMINICK,
Assistant

THE APPALACHIAN REGIONAL COMMISSION,
Washington, D.C., June 16, 1971.

Administrator, Office of Categorical Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. DOMINICK: Thank you for Mr. Greenfield's letter of June 4, 1971 expressing the desire of the Environmental Protection Agency to transfer $500,000 to the Appalachian Regional Commission to carry out environmental improvement planning in the Monongahela River Basin.

My letter to you of June 7, 1971 set forth the responsibilities which the Commission is prepared to discharge consistent with Congress' intent in making these funds available. We are prepared to accept the $500,000 providing the Commission's work is expanded to include:

(1) The design of a comprehensive environmental improvement program for the entire Monongahela Basin ;

(2) Increasing the depth of study and preliminary engineering in the areas identified in my June 7 letter; and

(3) All the work identified in my June 7 letter.

This would enable the Commission in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency to develop a prototype environmental plan which might be used elsewhere in Appalachia and the Nation to guide environmental planning by States, localities and the Federal Government.

It would be our intent, however, to expend only those funds required to accomplish these tasks. Should any funds remain they would be returned to the Treasury. Should additional funds be required the Commission would supply them from its appropriations. Sincerely,

DONALD W. WHITEHEAD,

Hon. DAVID D. DOMINICK,

Federal Cochairman.

THE APPALACHIAN REGIONAL COMMISSION,
Washington, D.C., June 7, 1971.

Deputy Assistant Administrator for Water Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. DOMINICK: This letter concerns the activities in furtherance of the study of methods for the elimination and control of acid and other mine water pollution which the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) is prepared to undertake in the Monongahela River Basin and follows your letter and a meeting with your staff on the subject. The efforts of both our agencies have been aimed at formulating a program responsive to the legislative intent expressed in the Conference Report which accompanied the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1971 (P.L. 91-665). The Conference Report said:

"The increase over the House bill amounts is for study and demonstration of methods for the elimination and control of acid and other mine water pollution in the Monongahela River Basin. The portion of the study and demonstration relating to the potential economic development in the Basin shall be carried on under the direction of the Appalachian Regional Development Commission." (H. Rep. No. 91-1794, 91st Cong., 2nd Sess., p. 10 (1970)).

Our reply took somewhat longer than originally anticipated. However, the increased amount of staff work accomplished in the intervening period allows us now to be more specific with respect to the details of the anticipated work program.

Following is a summary of our understanding of the agreement reached with your staff as to that work program, a description of the nature of the proposed studies, and the geographic areas for those studies.